S I OF POLICE vs BALAJI Advocate - SATHIYAMOORTHI T V — 300417/2011
Case under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 Section 3535(B)OFTNFACT. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 17th March 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNRP040002922011
Next Hearing
17th March 2026
Filing Number
300417/2011
Filing Date
09-12-2011
Registration No
300417/2011
Registration Date
09-12-2011
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Ranipet
Judge
5-District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Ranipet
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
S I OF POLICE
Adv. ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Respondent(s)
BALAJI Advocate - SATHIYAMOORTHI T V
RAJASEKARAN
Adv. SATHIYAMOORTHY T V
RAJESH
Adv. SATHIYAMOORTHY T V
SARAVANAN
Adv. SATHIYAMOORTHY T V
AMIRTHARAJ
Adv. KRISHNAMOORTHY G
KARUNAKARAN
Adv. RAVIKUMAR L
NANDHAGOPAL
Adv. LION SRIDHARAN G
Hearing History
Judge: 5-District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Ranipet
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Judgement
Questioning
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 05-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 27-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 23-02-2026 | Judgement |
| 20-02-2026 | Questioning |
Interim Orders
This is a deposition of witness (PW-6), not a court order with a final judgment. The witness testified in CC.NO. 417/2011 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Ranipet, regarding an illegal timber smuggling case. The witness described the seizure of sandalwood logs and vehicle TN 23 0452 on 15.12.2010, along with confessions from accused parties. Cross-examination by defense counsel is noted as accepted. No bail grant/denial or petition decision is present—this is trial evidence documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a deposition of witness (PW-6), not a court order with a final judgment. The witness testified in CC.NO. 417/2011 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Ranipet, regarding an illegal timber smuggling case. The witness described the seizure of sandalwood logs and vehicle TN 23 0452 on 15.12.2010, along with confessions from accused parties. Cross-examination by defense counsel is noted as accepted. No bail grant/denial or petition decision is present—this is trial evidence documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts